ARTICLE IN PRESS

Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020
Nophea Sasaki a,b,*, Wolfgang Knorr c, David R. Foster a, Hiroko Etoh b, Hiroshi Ninomiya b,
Sengtha Chay b, Sophanarith Kim d, Sengxi Sun b
a

Harvard Forest, Harvard University, 324 North Main Street, Petersham, MA 01366, USA
Graduate School of Applied Informatics, University of Hyogo, Kobe, Japan
c
QUEST, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
d
KIMSAS Institute, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 12 January 2009
Received in revised form 18 April 2009
Accepted 19 April 2009
Available online xxxx
Keywords:
Woody biomass
Wood bioenergy
Deforestation
Forest degradation
Land use change
Selective logging
Southeast Asia

a b s t r a c t
Forests in Southeast Asia are important sources of timber and other forest products, of local energy for
cooking and heading, and potentially as sources of bioenergy. Many of these forests have experienced
deforestation and forest degradation over the last few decades. The potential ow of woody biomass
for bioenergy from forests is uncertain and needs to be assessed before policy intervention can be successfully implemented in the context of international negotiations on climate change. Using current data,
we developed a forest land use model and projected changes in area of natural forests and forest plantations from 1990 to 2020. We also developed biomass change and harvest models to estimate woody biomass availability in the forests under the current management regime. Due to deforestation and logging
(including illegal logging), projected annual woody biomass production in natural forests declined from
815.9 million tons (16.3 EJ) in 1990 to 359.3 million tons (7.2 EJ) in 2020. Woody biomass production in
forest plantations was estimated at 16.2 million tons yr1 (0.3 EJ), but was strongly affected by cutting
rotation length. Average annual woody biomass production in all forests in Southeast Asia between
1990 and 2020 was estimated at 563.4 million tons (11.3 EJ) yr1 declining about 1.5% yr1. Without
incentives to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, and to promote forest rehabilitation and plantations, woody biomass as well as wood production and carbon stocks will continue to decline, putting
sustainable development in the region at risk as the majority of the population depend mostly on forest
ecosystem services for daily survival.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
International concerns about global warming caused by excessive emissions of greenhouse gases led to the adoption of the Kyoto
Protocol to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) in 1997. The protocol commits industrialized countries,
known as Annex I countries, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
during the rst commitment period between 2008 and 2012. As
the rst year of the rst commitment period ended, discussions
for the post-Kyoto climate change agreements were carried out
in December 2008 in Poznan, Poland. Several industrialized countries have pledged to reduce carbon emissions by up to 80% [1].
In addition to increasing energy efciency and increased reliance
on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) is
likely to be a important mitigation option in the post-Kyoto agree-

* Corresponding author. Address: Graduate School of Applied Informatics,

University of Hyogo Higashikawasaki-cho 1-3-3-22F, Chuo-ku, Kobe 650-0044,
Japan. Tel./fax: +81(78)367 8620.
E-mail address: sasakipapers@gmail.com (N. Sasaki).

ments, because deforestation and forest degradation are responsible for the release of about 1.52.2 Gt C yr1 [2,3] or about up to
25% of annual global emissions.
In addition to increasing carbon emissions, deforestation and
forest degradation reduce availability of woody biomass, on which
approximately 2.52.7 billion people [4,5] depend for daily cooking fuel. Given the widespread dependency on wood for energy
and the importance of forests to mitigate climate change, there is
a strong need to assess the future availability while developing a
path toward the sustainable use and management of forests. Canadell and Raupach [6] proposed four strategies for managing forests
for climate change mitigation. One of the strategies is to expand
the use of woody biomass to replace the use of fossil fuels. Smeets
and Faaij [7] provided an assessment of wood bioenergy potentials
on a global scale, concluding that there is high potential of woody
biomass from forests. Kinoshita et al. [8] evaluated the utilization
of thinned wood as bioenergy in Japan and concluded that bioenergy is increasingly important in substituting for the use of oil. Utilization of woody biomass has a potential role in global warming
mitigation because of its low emissions of greenhouse gases compared to the utilization of oil or coal for power generation [79]. To

0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
2

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

avoid power shortages such as occurred in 2001 in Brazil, the Brazilian government has launched incentive programs to encourage
the utilization of biomass (including woody biomass) as bioenergy
[10]. All these studies show the importance of woody biomass in
climate change mitigation and sustainable development.
Although the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United
Nations Regional Wood Energy Development Program (referred
to as FAO-RWEDP hereafter, [5]) provided an estimate of woodfuels in South and Southeast Asia, their estimate did not incorporate
the illegal logging activities and signicant logging damages that
occur commonly in the region [1113]. Their estimate also did
not consider local uses of wood, an important consideration given
the fact that the availability of woody biomass is directly linked to
daily survival in this region. About 3090% of the population in
individual countries in Southeast Asia depends entirely on woody
biomass for daily cooking and heating [14]. Furthermore, as deforestation and forest degradation continue, the future availability of
wood for this region is at risk. Between 1990 and 2005, forest area
in Southeast Asia declined approximately 2.6 million ha annually
(about 1.2%) to 216.4 million ha in 2005 [15]. In addition, forest
degradation due to logging (including illegal logging) and related
damages causes the gradual loss of forest biomass and carbon
stocks [16]. As the population and the demand for woody biomass
continue to rise, the current and future availability of woody biomass need to be assessed so that appropriate policies can be
introduced.
The aim of this study is to provide an assessment of the availability of woody biomass and bioenergy in eleven countries in
Southeast Asia under current forest management regime, which includes illegal logging and logging damages. The paper is structured
as follows: (1) forest land use change models are developed to estimate the rate of deforestation and reforestation through forest
plantations and (2) woody biomass and harvesting models are
developed to estimate the biomass changes under current management regimes, and potential woody biomass for bioenergy generation is estimated.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Forests in Southeast Asia
Southeast Asian countries in our study include Brunei, Burma,
Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. This region has experienced fast
economic development and the gradual loss of forest resources.
Changes in areas of natural forests and forest plantations between
1990 and 2005 are given in Table 1. According to FAO [15], natural
forests consist of production, multiple-purpose, and unspecied

forests, protected forest, conservation forest, and forest for social

services. The rst three categories are grouped as production forest
(PdF), where commercial logging and land development can take
place, while the latter three categories are grouped as protected
forest (PrF), where traditional rewood collection and small-scale
logging for housing by local forest communities can take place.
There are two types of forest plantations (FP) in the tropics, namely
fast growing species plantation (FPf), which account for 47% of the
total plantations and slow growing species plantation (FPs), which
account for the rest [17]. For our study the proportion of fast and
slow-growing plantation remains unchanged during the modeling
period between 1990 and 2020.
2.2. Land use models
Over the last 15 years, although area of natural forests in Southeast Asia continued to decrease, area of forest plantations slowly
increased as shown in Table 1. It could be argued that part of the
deforested lands was replaced by forest plantations. Therefore,
for our study, it is assumed that deforested lands are partially replaced by forest plantations (see Fig. 1 for illustration). With this
assumption, the change in area of natural forests and forest plantations can be estimated using models developed by Kim Phat et al.
[16]

dPdFt
ka kb  PdFt
dt
dPrFt
0
dt
dFPt
ka  PdFt
dt

1
2
3

where PdF(t) is production forest at time t, PrF(t) protected forest,

FP(t) forest plantation, (ka + ka) is the change of PdF(t), and ka is
the change of FP(t).
Data in Table 2 are used to derive (ka + kb), ka, and the initial
values (t = 0 in 1990) for areas of PdF and FP using least square
method. According to FAO [15], the area of protected forests in
the tropics increased by approximately 0.07% from 1990 to 2005.
During the modeling period of this study, PrF is considered to remain unchanged.
2.3. Woody biomass models
Standing biomass refers to all above-ground biomass in tons of
dry matter, woody biomass refers to biomass available for bioenergy generation, and bioenergy refers to energy content in woody
biomass. Leaves and root biomass are not included.

Table 1
Changes in area of forests in Southeast Asia 19902005.
Country

Brunei Darussalam
Cambodia
Indonesia
Laos
Malaysia
Myanmar
Philippines
Singapore
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Vietnam
Total
Total (million ha)

1990 (000 ha)

2005 (000 ha)

NF

FP

Total

Total

NF

FP

Total

313.0
12946.0
116567.0
17314.0
22376.0
39219.0
10574.0
2.0
15965.0
966.0
9363.0
245605.0
245.6

0.0
67.0
2209.0
4.0
1956.0
394.0
1780.0
0.0
2640.0
29.0
967.0
10046.0
10.0

313.0
13013.0
118776.0
17318.0
24332.0
39613.0
12354.0
2.0
18605.0
995.0
10330.0
255651.0
255.6

288.0
11613.0
100854.0
16631.0
23250.0
35250.0
8801.0
2.0
17891.0
897.0
13775.0
229252.0
229.2

278.0
10447.0
88495.0
16142.0
20890.0
32222.0
7162.0
2.0
14520.0
798.0
12931.0
203887.0
203.9

0.0
59.0
3399.0
224.0
1573.0
849.0
620.0
0.0
3099.0
43.0
2695.0
12561.0
12.6

278.0
10506.0
91894.0
16366.0
22463.0
33071.0
7782.0
2.0
17619.0
841.0
15626.0
216448.0
216.4

Source: FAO [15].

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
3

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

-(ka+kb)= loss
Protected Forest (PrF)
PrF
PrF

Production Forest
(PdF)

PdF

Forest Plantation (FP)

FP

PdF
Future?

FP

Area of tropical
forests in
Southeast Asia in
2000

Area of tropical
forests in
Southeast Asia in
1990

ka=increase

Area of tropical
forests in
Southeast Asia in
2005

Fig. 1. Illustration of forest land use change model. Note: it is assumed that new plantations are established on deforested land only (i.e. deforested PdF).

Table 2
Data used to derivea land use models initial values and parameters.
Year

NF (million ha)

FP (million ha)

Tropical Forests (million ha)

PdF

PrF

Subtotal

FPf

FPs

Subtotal

1990
2000
2005
Initial value
Parameters

158.4
130.5
116.7
158.7
(ka + kb) = 0.0202

87.2
87.2

245.6
217.7
203.9

10.0
11.6
12.6
10.1
ka = 0.0009

255.7
229.3
216.4

NF: Natural forests.

PdF: Natural production forest.
PrF: Natural protected forest.
FP: Forest plantations.
FPf: Fast-growing forest plantation.
FPs: Slow growing forest plantation.
a
Least square method was used to derive initial values and parameters.

2.3.1. Natural forests

A conceptual diagram illustrating the allocation of biomass is
given in Fig. 2.
To estimate the standing biomass change in Southeast Asia, the
following equations modied from Kim Phat et al. [16] are used:

dSBi t
MAIi  Hi t  ddBi t
dt
fw  fT SBi t
Hi t

1  r CC
ddBi t Hi t
WASi t s  Hi t

4
5
6
7
1

where SBi(t) is standing biomass in i forest (PdF, PrF) (ton ha ),

MAIi mean annual biomass increment, Hi(t) harvested biomass,
ddBi (t) dead biomass caused by logging, WASi(t) biomass waste
due to trimming, felling, skidding and/or transporting, fW the fraction of harvested stand biomass, fT the fraction of mature-tree
stand biomass, CC the cutting cycle, r the illegal logging rate, s
the rate of biomass waste. It is unlikely that illegal loggers will
harvest immature trees because of no market demand for such
trees, and therefore r 6 1fW. In our study the values for MAI,

WAS, fW, fT, CC, and r (Table 3) are based on various country reports [16]. Under conventional logging in East Kalimantan, every
one cubic meter of harvested wood resulted in the dying of 0.9
1.2 m3 of life biomass [18]. In the same region, Sist et al. [19]
estimated that logging 10 trees caused damage to other 309 trees
all with a diameter at breast height over 10 cm, of which 206
trees were killed immediately. Therefore, for this study, ddBi (t)
is assumed to be the same as Hi(t) for every time step. An energy
content of 20 GJ ton1 of dry woody biomass [20] is used for energy estimates for biomass from natural forests and forest
plantations.
Total woody biomass available for bioenergy (BIE) in natural
forests (NF) is estimated as

BIEt

2
X
ddBi t WASi t iuWASi t  NFi t

i1

where iuWASi is in-use wasted wood due to wood processing at the

wood processing factories (see Fig. 2), NFi(t) is PdF(t) and PrF(0)
Total biomass available for furniture making (BIF) is estimated
as

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
4

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

Natural Forests

Forest Plantations

SBi

SBj

When harvested

iuWPi=
Hi*(1-s)*a

iuWAS i=
Hi-iuWPi

WAS i=
Hi*s

ddBi=
Hi

ddB j

PPLj
For pulp production

For woody biomass

For furniture makings

Fig. 2. Conceptual diagram for biomass allocation. Note: SBi is standing biomass in natural forest i, iuWPi is in-use wood product; iuWASi is in-use wasted wood, WASi is wasted
wood due to felling, skidding, trimming and/or transporting; ddBi is dead woody biomass caused by logging. SBj is standing biomass in forest plantation j, ddBj dead woody
biomass in branches and top logs, PPJj is biomass in stem for pulp production (PPJj = SBj/BEFj, where BEF is biomass expansion factor. BEFj values are presented in Table 4).

Table 3
Initial values and parameters for modeling biomass in natural forests.

Stem volume
SB(0)a (stand biomass at t = 0)
MAIb (mean annual increment)
fW (fraction of harvested stand biomass)
fT (fraction of mature-tree stand biomass)
CC (cutting cycle)
r (rate of illegal logging)
sc (fraction of wasted wood)
ad (see Fig. 1) (processing efciency)
WD (wood density)
BEF (biomass expansion factor)
Leaves, le
Energy content
a
b
c
d
e

PdF

PrF

Unit

Remarks and sources

200
194.6
1.0
0.3
0.5
30
0.53
0.3
0.5
0.57
1.74
0.019
20

200
194.6
1.0
0.1
0.5
30
0.53
0.3
0.5
0.57
1.74
0.019
GJ per oven

m3 ha1
ton ha1
ton ha1 yr1
%
%
yrs
%
%
%
ton m3

Taken from Kim Phat et al. [16]

Dry wood including branches, but without leaves
Dry wood including branches (no leaves, 1.9% of all; converted from [16]
30% of stand biomass of mature trees ([16] for PdF, 10% is assumed for PrF
50% mature biomass take from [Kim Phat et al. 16]
[16]
[16]
Seec
[21]
[22]
[22]
[23]
[20]

try ton

V*WD*BEF*(1-l), leaves are considered as litters that are left behind as nutrients.
1*WD*BEF*(1-l), MAI in stem is 1 m3 ha1 yr1 (based on Kim Phat et al. [16]).
Based on FAO [13], Homes et al. [24], and Sist and Saridan [25].
Based on Loehnertz et al. [21].
Based on Nascimentoa and Laurance [23].

BIFt

2
X

iuWPi t  NFi t

i1

where iuWPi is in-use wood product (see Fig. 2)

2.3.2. Forest plantations
Unlike natural forests, mean annual increment is faster in forest
plantations, where a clear-cut system is applied. For this study, a
logistic model is used to estimate biomass in forest plantations



dSBj t
SBj t
aj  SBj t  1 
dt
SBMAX;j

10

where SBj(t) is standing biomass in j plantations (j is fast-growing

plantation, FPf and slow-growing plantation, FPs) (ton ha1), aj is
the growth rate of a forest plantation, BMAX,j is the maximum
wood biomass that a plantation can reach. Based on Brown [26]
in Table 4, average standing biomass increment is 7.7 and
5.9 ton ha1 yr1 (see note under Table 4 for calculation) over
10-yr and 40-yr cutting rotation (CR) (Tables 4 and 5) for FPf
and FPs, respectively (see note under Table 4 for calculation). In
reality, BMAX,,j is unknown because forest plantations are usually
harvested before they reach maturity age. For this study, BMAX,j
is assumed at 200 and 300 ton ha1 for FPf and FPs. With these
assumptions, a and SBj(0) for FPf and FPs are derived at 0.2765
and 0.1337, and 7.7 and 5.9 ton ha1 yr1, respectively. All harvested stem biomass is assumed to be used for pulp production

(PPLj), and the rest in branches and top logs are summed to be
woody biomass for bioenergy generation (ddBj) (see Fig. 2). Biomass in leaves (1.9% of the total above-ground biomass [23]) is
left behind in the eld.
Total standing biomass in forest plantation j, SBFPj(t) at time t, is

SBFPj tn FPAj t0  SBj t n FPAj t1  SBj tn1   

FPAj tn  SBj t 0

11

where FPAj(t) is the actual planted area at time t (million ha).

Total standing biomass in all plantations (SBFPTOTAL) is therefore

SBFPTOTAL tn

2
X

SBFPj tn

12

j1

Once each forest plantation reaches the CR age (t = CR), all biomass
is harvested. Plantations established in 1990 (start of the model)
will be harvested in 1999 for FPf and in 2029 for FPs. Replanting
is assumed to be carried out 1 year after harvesting.
Total biomass available for pulp production (BIP) at time t = n in
forest plantations is

BIPtn

2
X
SBFPj tn
BEFj
j1

13

where BEFj is a biomass expansion factor (see note under Table 4).
And woody biomass available for bioenergy (BIE) at time t = n is

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
5

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

Table 4
Mean annual increments and cutting rotations for forest plantations.
MAI range (ha1 yr1)

Species

X (m )
Min

Rotation (yrs)a

Countries

Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam

Indonesia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea
Laos, Philippines, and Vietnam
Philippines, Thailand
Malaysia

Y (ton)
Max

Min

Max

6.5
10.0
12.0
19.0
8.0
12.5
Eucalyptus species
8.0
12.5
6.5
10.0
Mean
8.2
12.8
For this study (fast growing species)

4.8
8.8
5.9
5.9
4.8
6.0
7.7

7.4
14.0
9.2
9.2
7.4
9.4

15
8

Casuarina species

4.9
1.5
2.9
4.9
4.9
7.8
3.9
4.4
5.9

7.3
2.4
4.9
7.3
7.3
17.5
5.8
7.5

1535

Acacia auriculiformis
Acacia mangium

5.0
7.5
1.5
2.5
Dalbergia sissoo
3.0
5.0
Swietenia macrophylla
5.0
7.5
Terminalia species
5.0
7.5
Tectona grandis
8.0
18.0
4.0
6.0
Mean
4.5
7.7
For this study (slow growing species)

515

10

24
32
44

India and Vietnam

Angola, Benin, Cuba, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Senegal, Somalia and Thailand
Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, India, Nepal, Nigeria and Pakistan
Indonesia and Philippines
Bhutan, India and Jamaica
Colombia, Costa Rica, Jamaica, Nicaragua, Panama and Trinidad and Tobago
Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam

40

Source: Brown [26].

Note: Y = X  WD  BEF  (1  0.019) where WD is wood density, WD = 0.5 based on Miranda et al. [27] and Arroja et al. [28] for fast growing species and WD = 0.57 [22] for
slow growing species; and BEF is biomass expansion factor, BEF = 1.50 [26]. (2006) and 1.74 [22] for fast growing and slow growing species, respectively, 0.019 is 1.9% in
leaves [23].
a
Rotation length was taken as an average of rotation length of major species reported in Varmola and Del Lungo [29].

Table 5
Parameters for modeling biomass in forest plantations.
FPf
BMAX
B(0)

a
MAI
CC
WD
BEF
Litters
Energy content

BIEt n

2
X

200
7.7
0.2765
7.7
10
0.50
1.50
0.019
20

SBFPj tn  BIPj tn

FPs
300
5.9
0.1337
5.9
40
0.57
1.74
0.019
GJ per oven try ton

Unit

Remarks and source

1

ton ha
ton ha1

Maximum standing biomass (all aboveground but without leaves)

All aboveground but without leaves

ton ha1 yr1

yrs

[26]
[26]
[27] for fast, [22] for slow-growing plantation
[28] for fast, [22] for slow-growing plantation
[23]
[20]

14

j1

data used. Deforestation between 1990 and 2005 is estimated

at 2.6 million ha yr1 by our model, which matches very well
with that estimated by FAO [15].

3. Results and discussions

3.2. Standing biomass changes

3.1. Changes in area of forests

Owing to deforestation and forest degradation, standing biomass in natural forests rapidly declines from 45858.7 million tons
(about 957.2 EJ) in 1990 to 26597.4 million tons (531.9 EJ) in
2020, losing about 708.7 million tons yr1(14.2 EJ) or about
1.5% yr1. Standing biomass in forest plantations is strongly inuenced by cutting rotation, increasing to 1013.8 million tons

Over the modeling period, the area of natural forests declines from 245.9 million ha (231.1 for the 95% lower bound
and 262.3 for the upper bound) in 1990 to 173.7 million ha
(165.6182.6)
in
2020,
losing
annually
about
2.0%
[(ka + kb) = 0.0202]. Mean annual changes in area of natural
forests and forest plantation are estimated at 2.8 million ha yr1
between 1990 and 2005, and 2.4 million ha yr1 between 1990
and 2020 (Table 6). The area of forest plantations slowly increases to 16.0 million ha (15.216.8) from 10.1 million ha
(9.810.2) in 1990, increasing about 0.2 million ha yr1 (Fig. 3).
Because only about 0.09% (ka = 0.0009) of deforested forestland
is converted to forest plantations, our results suggest that most
of the deforested land is converted to other types of land uses.
Altogether, Southeast Asia loses about 2.2 million ha yr1 (2.0
2.4) of forests over the modeling period (Table 6). A previous
study by Kim Phat et al. [16] estimated deforestation in this region at 1.6 million ha yr1 between 1980 and 2050. This variation may be due to the different modeling timeframe and the

Table 6
Mean annual changes in area of natural forests and forest plantations (19902020).
Forests

Natural forests
PdF
PrF
Forest plantations
PFf
PFs
Total

19902005

19902020

(million ha)

(% to 1990)

(million ha)

(% to 1990)

2.8
2.8
0

1.7
1.7
0

2.4
2.4
0

1.5
1.5
0

0.2
0.1
0.1

1.7
0.8
0.9

0.2
0.1
0.1

2.0
0.9
1.0

2.6

1.0

2.2

0.9

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
6

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

300

250

TF_upper

TF

TF_lower

PdF_upper

PdF

PdF_data

PdF_lower

PrF

FP

FP_data

Forest Area (million ha)

200

150

100

50

19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
20
14
20
16
20
18
20
20

Fig. 3. Changes in area of forests in Southeast Asia (19902020). Note: Condence intervals for FP are not included because they are very small.

(20.3 EJ) in 2020 from merely 67.8 million tons (1.3 EJ) in 1990.
Altogether, Southeast Asian forests are projected to lose about
Table 7
Total standing biomass in natural forests and forest plantations (19902020).
Forest type

1990

2005

2020

Annual change
19902005

19902020

Million tons yr1

Million tons
Natural forests
PdF
PrF
Forest plantations
PFfa
PFsb

47858.7
30884.7
16974.1
67.8
36.4
31.4

34202.9
17765.9
16436.9
367.4
150.2
217.2

26597.4
10611.6
15985.8
1013.8
92.5
921.3

910.4
874.6
35.8
20.0
7.6
12.4

708.7
675.8
32.9
31.5
1.9
29.7

Total

47926.6

34570.3

27611.2

890.4

677.2

Total (EJc)

958.5

691.4

552.2

17.8

13.5

In terms of carbon stock changes (TgC yr1)d

Natural forests
23929.4
17101.4
13298.7
Forest plantations
33.9
183.7
506.9

455.2
10.0

354.4
15.8

Total

445.2

338.6

23963.3

17285.1

13805.6

Note: Minus sign () refers to carbon sinks.

a
Standing biomass is strongly affected by cutting rotation.
b
Standing biomass will be harvested in 2029, thereafter standing biomass will be
reduced.
c
EJ is exajoule (1 EJ = 109 GJ).
d
Multiplying by 0.5 carbon content in dry woody biomass. One tetragram carbon
(TgC) is one million tons of carbon.

677.2 million tons yr1 (13.5 EJ) between 1990 and 2020 (Table
7).
3.3. Annual woody biomass and bioenergy production
In terms of woody biomass, natural forests produce, an average
of 547.2 24.6 million tons yr1 ( is standard error) (10.9 EJ) between 1990 and 2020, decreasing from 657.8 23.0 million tons yr1 (13.1 EJ) between 1990 and 2005 (Fig. 4, Table 8).
Forest plantations produce another 16.2 7.5 million tons yr1
(0.3 EJ) between 1990 and 2020. Altogether, total annual production of woody biomass is 563.4 million tons (11.3 EJ) over the same
period between 1990 and 2020. Total energy consumption in
Southeast Asia was estimated at 6.4 EJ in 1990 and 15.7 EJ in
2006, increasing about 9.0% yr1 [30]. Energy from woodfuels in
Southeast Asia (excluding Singapore and Brunei) was estimated
at 2.4 EJ in 1993 [14] or about 33.1% of the total energy consumption in that year [30]. Energy from woodfuels in this region increased, on average about 2.5% yr1 between 1992 and 1995
[14]. Therefore, without effective policy to reducing deforestation
and forest degradation, energy shortage is likely to occur in Southeast Asia.
Using carbon coefcients of 25 kgC GJ1 for coal, 20 kgC GJ1 for
petroleum products, and 15 kgC GJ1 for natural gas [31], carbon
emission reductions associated with using woody biomass instead
of fossil fuels for energy generation are estimated at 281.7 TgC yr1
for replacing coal, 225.3 TgC yr1 for replacing petroleum products,

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
7

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

900

Total
PdF

800

PrF
FPf

-1

Wood Biomass (million ton yr )

700

FPs

600

500
400
300
200
100

18

16

14

20
20

20

20

10

08

12

20

20

20

06

20

04

20

02

20

20

00

98

20

96

19

92

94

19

19

19

19

90

Fig. 4. Annual wood bioenergy production in Southeast Asia. Note: Fast-growing plantation established in 1990 become harvestable in 1999. Its annual woody biomass
production is strongly affected by cutting rotation. Slow-growing plantation will become harvestable in 2029, and therefore more woody biomass production is expected
thereafter.

Table 8
Mean annual woody biomass and bioenergy production, end-use wood and pulp production in Southeast Asia.
Year

19902005

Forests

Million tons yr1

Natural forests
BIE
BIF (million m3)a
PdF
BIE
BIF (million m3)a
PrF
BIE
BIF (million m3)a
Forest Plantations
BIE
BIP (million m3)a
FPf
BIE
BIP (million m3)a
FPs
BIE
BIP (million m3)a
Total
BIE (million ton)
BIF (million m3)
BIP (million m3)

19902020
EJ yr1

Million tons yr1

EJ yr1

Mean

s.e.c

Mean

s.e.

Mean

s.e.

Mean

s.e.

657.8
110.6

23.0
3.9

13.2

0.5

547.2
92.0

24.6
4.1

10.9

0.5

533.4
89.7

22.7
3.8

10.7

0.5

424.5
71.4

24.3
4.1

8.5

0.5

124.4
20.9

0.3
0.1

2.5

0.0

122.6
20.6

0.4
0.1

2.5

0.0

15.7
62.8

14.3
57.2

0.3

0.3

16.2
64.8

7.5
30.2

0.3

0.2

15.7
62.8

14.3
57.2

0.3

0.3

16.2
64.8

7.5
30.2

0.3

0.2

0
0
673.5
110.6
62.8

0
0
13.5

In terms of carbon emissions reductionsb (in TgC yr1) by using wood bioenergy to replace
Coal
336.7
Petroleum products
269.4
Natural gas
202.0

563.4
92.0
64.8

11.3

281.7
225.3
169.0

BIE: woody biomass available for bioenergy.

BIF: biomass available for furniture making.
BIP: biomass available for pulp production (BIP).
a
Converted by taking biomass dividing by wood density.
b
Derived by multiplying bioenergy (1 EJ = 109 GJ) with carbon coefcients of 25 kgC GJ1 for coal, 20 kgC GJ1 for petroleum products, and 15 kgC GJ1 for natural gas [31]
and dividing by 109 (1 TgC = 109 kgC).
c
s.e. is standard error.

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
8

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

Table 9
Previous studies on wood bioenergy.
Authors

Methods

Major variables

Scale

Results

This study

Land use change model, biomass stock change

model, biomass harvesting model

Natural forests, forest

plantation, illegal
logging, forest
degradation

Regional

FAO-Regional Wood
Energy
Development
Program
Koopmans [5]
Smeets and Faaij [7]

Extrapolation using data 19901995. Biomass

growth is assumed to increase 1% every year.
Biomass growth of plantation was assumed at 6
10 m3 ha1 yr1. 80% of non-wooded lands also
produce woodfuels
Potential woody biomass in all forests is obtained
by multiplying forest area and gross annual
increment (GAI) under various scenarios. Data on
forest area and GAI were taken from FAO [3436]
Global land-use and energy model (GLUE)

Natural forests, forest

plantations, non-wooded
lands. No illegal logging

Regional

Deforestation and forest degradation reduce about

18.1 EJ yr1 between 1990 and 2020. Potential
bioenergy is 10.9 EJ yr1 between 1990 and 2020.
Potential wood bioenergy (no illegal logging) is
7.0 EJ in 1994 and 5.9 EJ yr1 between 1990 and
2020
Potential wood bioenergy is 6.7 EJ in 1994 from
forested land in Southeast Asia

Natural forests, forest

plantations, and tree
outside forests. Only GAI
is harvested
Natural forests, forest
plantations, arable lands

Global

Deforestation reduces about 13.0 EJ yr1 between

1998 and 2050

Global

Potential wood bioenergy is 45.985.2 EJ in 2100

in all developing countries worldwide

Yamamoto et al. [33]

50000
45000

Standing Biomass (million ton)

40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
r=0, decreasing 1.1% annually

15000

r=0.53, decreasing 1.5% annually (this study)

10000

r=0.73, decreasing 1.9% annually

5000

98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
20
14
20
16
20
18
20
20

94

92

96

19

19

19

19

19

90

Fig. 5. Standing biomass in natural forests under different rates of illegal logging.

and 169.0 TgC yr1 for replacing natural gas throughout the modeling period (Table 8).
3.4. Comparison with previous studies
Our models project 92.0 4.1 (52.4 million tons) and
64.8 30.2 million m3 (33.3 million tons), of wood for furniture
making and pulpwood production over the modeling period (Table
8). Industrial roundwood in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia,
Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam between 1991 and
2001 was reported at 77.2 5.6 million m3 yr1 [32]. With the
addition of roundwood from illegal logging (r = 0.53), the above
gure would have been 164.2 million m3 [=77.2/(1  0.53)], which
is equivalent to about 82.2 million m3 (= 164.2  0.5, 0.5 is wood
processing efciency) of end-use wood products, about 9.8 million m3 lower than our estimate. This difference may be due to
the unreported wood production from illegal logging in some
countries in the region.
Results from previous studies on wood bioenergy using different methods and assumptions are also compared here. Surrounded
by uncertainties as identied by Koopmans [5], FAO-RWEDP esti-

mated the potential wood bioenergy from forested land in Southeast Asia at about 6.7 EJ in 1994. If no illegal logging would take
place, our model estimates wood bioenergy at 7.0 EJ in 1994 and
5.9 EJ yr1 between 1990 and 2020 in the same region (Table 9).
Smeets and Faaij [7] estimated the loss of wood bioenergy due to
tropical deforestation at 13.0 EJ yr1 between 1998 and 2050.
Our estimate of wood bioenergy loss due to deforestation and forest degradation is 18.1 EJ yr1 between 1990 and 2020. This difference may result from different methods and assumptions (Table 9).
Using a global land-use and energy model (GLUE), Yamamoto et al.
[33] estimated wood bioenergy in all developing countries worldwide at 45.985.2 EJ in 2100. Because of the difference in study
methods, assumptions, and scales, the results of their study are expected to be higher than our estimate for Southeast Asia only.

4. Sensitivity analysis
Illegal logging is strongly affected by the political stability and
governance in Southeast Asia. If an illegal logging rate of 73%
(r = 0.73) as reported in Indonesia [37] is used in all natural forests

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
9

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

1500.0
r=0.73, losing 32.0 million ton annually
r=0.53, losing 15.1 million ton (this study)

1200.0
-1

Woody Biomass (million ton yr )

r=0, losing 5.4 million ton

900.0

600.0

300.0

20

16

18

20

20

12

14

20

20

10

20

20

06
20
08

20

04

02

20

98

00

20

20

94

96

19

19

92

19

19

19

90

0.0

Fig. 6. Woody biomass production from all forests under different rates of illegal logging. Note: Illegal logging leads to more production of woody biomass in the beginning,
but it starts to decline sharply. Additionally, deforestation is also responsible for the gradual loss of woody biomass as seen in the gure above (green line) when all illegal
logging is halted. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this gure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

(NF), standing biomass in NF declines from 47858.7 million tons

(957.2 EJ) in 1990 to 20652.2 million tons (413.0 EJ) in 2020, a loss
of about 1.9% annually. If illegal logging is eliminated (r = 0), standing biomass declines to 32393.3 million tons (647.9 EJ), losing only
about 1.1% as a result of deforestation (Fig. 5). In terms of woody
biomass production, our models project the mean annual production from all forests at 301.0 (6.0 EJ), 563.8 (11.3 EJ), and 831.7 million tons (16.6 EJ) for r = 0, r = 0.53 (r = 0.53 was used in our study),
and r = 0.73, respectively (Fig. 6). According to Fig. 6, illegal logging
is likely to cause a signicant decline in annual woody biomass production. This suggestion is also supported by Meyfroidt and Lambin
[41] who found a sharp decline in stand density of natural forests in
Vietnam. International policy may inuence biomass production.
For example, if ongoing discussions lead to the inclusion of the reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) in the
post-Kyoto climate change agreement period from 2013 to 2020, a
large amount of biomass loss as well as carbon emissions could be
prevented. Therefore, woody biomass production will also change.
Once slow-growing plantations become harvestable, woody biomass production is expected to increase as well.
Another uncertainty of our study relates to the potential increase of woody biomass obtaining from forest rehabilitation as
being increasingly implemented in Indonesia [38], Philippines
[39], and Vietnam [40], but see Meyfroidt and Lambin [41]. Forest
rehabilitation could bring the deforested land or severely degraded
forest back to its pre-harvest level, and therefore would eventually
increase woody biomass. Annual or biannual re-assessment may
reduce the future uncertainties regarding biomass projection.
5. Policy implications for woody biomass production under
REDD
The current climate change agreement discussions include
REDD in the post-Kyoto agreements and give hope for tropical for-

est conservation. The Bali Action [42] and the sustained interest in
REDD during the 14th conference of the parties in Poznan in
December in 2008 [43] have led to increased attention to REDD
[44,6]. If REDD is nally adopted, well-dened land-use and logging planning that addresses the causes of deforestation is required. The causes of deforestation in Southeast Asia could be
classied to be (1) the need for land for agricultural cultivation
to feed increasing population [45], (2) industrial plantation development [46], and (3) indiscriminate logging [12,24,47]. The former
is unavoidable because of the need for survival and requires wellassessed planning and policies to encourage sustainable practices.
The latter two may be due to policy failures or the lack for incentives for long-term conservation of tropical forests. Economic, social, and ecological assessments of different land use options that
take into consideration the nancial incentives for protecting natural forests under REDD agreements are necessary so that resource
managers be they government or companies will have a clear
picture in terms of the nancial returns and long-term social and
ecological consequences of their decisions.
In order to control indiscriminate logging and its associated forest degradation, incentives are needed to promote reduced impact
logging (RIL) which has been proven to reduce damages [12,24] to
residual trees and soil, reduce wood waste (the latter is due to untrained trimming, skidding, and transporting), and increase carbon
sinks [47]. The REDD agreements are likely to result in decreases in
woody biomass, as overexploitation and illegal logging would be
gradually brought under control and the perpetual ow of ecosystem services for sustainable development could be ensured. As forest rehabilitation projects have been increasingly implemented in
Indonesia [38], Philippines [39], and Vietnam [40,41], incentives
for further promoting the widespread implementation of such projects in other countries in the region could also lead to increase in
woody biomasses as well as wood production. Furthermore, alternative sources of energy such as wind and solar power, and bioen-

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
10

N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

ergy through accelerating the development of plantations on

deforested lands should be sought. Financial incentives made
available through REDD agreements should be used wholly or partially for such alternatives.
Incentives or investment in plantations of hybrid species which,
grow faster and are environmentally adaptable on already deforested lands would lead to the increase of woody biomass and pulpwood production for bioenergy and paper. Plantations could also
decrease the pressure on natural forests whose ecosystem services
and functioning are vital to sustainable development. Mean annual
increment of some hybrid fast growing species of Eucalyptus (such
as E. grandis) reaches 5360 m3 h1 yr1 (about 39.745.0 tons of
all above-ground biomass) [48]. If this growth rate could be
achieved, future supplies of woody biomass and pulp are likely
to come from forest plantations, while natural forests are managed
for full ecosystem services.
6. Conclusions
This study developed models to estimate forest land use
changes, standing biomass, and woody biomass (for bioenergy
generation) in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. It also discussed the incentives for reducing deforestation and implementing
sustainable forest management in the region. Our study methods
could be applicable to any country or region where selective logging is practiced.
The results show that Southeast Asian forests produce about
563.8 million tons yr1 (11.3 EJ) of woody biomass for the period
spanning 19902020. The annual production of woody biomass
decreases about 1.5% over the same period. Without appropriate
measures to reduce deforestation and bring forests under sustainable management, Southeast Asia is likely to face a shortage of
woody biomass. Furthermore, if the current deforestation and forest degradation continue, wood production, woody biomass, climate regulation (including carbon sequestration), watershed
protection, and ecosystem functioning will be adversely affected,
which, in turn could put sustainable development in the region
at risk because a large part of population in this region depend
on forests and their ecosystems for daily survival. Countries in
the region should take advantages of the international agreements
such as the Kyoto Protocol or post-Kyoto agreements, i.e. REDD, to
reduce deforestation and forest degradation. At the same time,
alternative sources of woody biomass, i.e. from forest rehabilitation and plantations, should be made available, because, currently
only 0.08% of the 2.4 million ha deforested land is converted to forest plantations, and the majority of these lands are still available
for plantation.
Our results also suggest that using woody biomass to replace
the use of fossil fuels for energy generation could prevent carbon
emissions of about 169.0281.7 TgC yr1 between 1990 and 2020.
Acknowledgement
This work is funded through the Harvard Forests Charles Bullard Fellowship in Forest Research for Advanced Research and
Study at Harvard University and a Grant-in-Aid for Scientic Research (No. 18402003) from the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science, and technology of Japan. The authors gratefully
thank Betsy Colburn and Jonathan Thompson of Harvard Forest,
Harvard University for commenting and English editing. We also
thank the editor and reviewers for their invaluable comments.
References
[1] UNFCCC. Press release of the conference of the parties on its fourteenth
session, held in Poznan from 1 to 12 December 2008. UNFCCC; 2008.

[2] Gullison FR, Frumhoff CP, Canadell GJ, Field CB, Nepstad DC, Hayhoe K, et al.
Tropical forests and climate policy. Science 2007;136:9856.
[3] Houghton RA. Revised estimates of the annual net ux of carbon to the
atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 18502000.
Tellus 55B 2003;2:37890.
[4] Gaye A. Access to energy and human development. Fighting climate change:
human solidarity in a divided world. Human Development Report 2007/2008.
UNDP: New York; 2007.
[5] Koopmans A. Biomass energy demand and supply for South and South-East
Asiaassessing the resource base. Biomass Bioenergy 2005;28:13350.
[6] Canadell JG, Raupach MR. Managing forests for climate change mitigation.
Science 2008;320:14567.
[7] Smeets MW, Faaij APC. Bioenergy potentials from forestry in 2050. An
assessment of the drivers that determine the potentials. Climatic Change
2007;81:35390.
[8] Kinoshita T, Inoue K, Iwao K, Kagemoto H, Yamagata Y. A spatial evaluation of
forest biomass usage using GIS. Appl Energy 2009;86(1):18.
[9] Sathre R, Gustavsson L. Using wood products to mitigate climate change:
External costs and structural change. Appl Energy 2009;86(2):2517.
[10] Filho PA, Badr O. Biomass resources for energy in North-Eastern Brazil. Appl
Energy 2004;77:5167.
[11] Sist P, Saridan A. Stand structure and oristic composition of a primary
lowland dipterocarp forest in East Kalimantan. J Trop Forest Sci
1999;11(4):70422.
[12] Sist P, Sheil D, Kartawinata K, Priyadi H. Reduced-impact logging in Indonesian
Borneo: some results conrming the need for new silvicultural prescriptions.
Forest Ecol Manage 2003;179:41527.
[13] FAO. Financial and economic assessment of timber harvesting operations in
Sarawak, Malaysia. Forest Harvesting Case Studies 17. FAO, Rome; 2001.
[14] FAO. Regional study on wood energy today and tomorrow in Asia. Field
Document No. 50. Bangkok: FAO; 1997.
[15] FAO. Global forest resources assessment 2005. Progress towards sustainable
forest management. FAO Forestry Paper 147, Rome; 2005.
[16] Kim Phat N, Knorr W, Kim S. Appropriate measures for conservation of
terrestrial carbon stocks analysis of trends of forest management in
Southeast Asia. Forest Ecol Manage 2004;191:28399.
[17] FAO. Global forest resource assessments 2000 (main report). FAO forestry
paper 140, Rome; 2001.
[18] Iskandar H, Snook LK, Toma T, MacDicken KG, Kanninen M. A comparison of
damage due to logging under different forms of resource access in East
Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forest Ecol Manage 2006;237:8393.
[19] Sist P, Nolan T, Bertault JG, Dykstra DP. Harvesting intensity versus
sustainability in Indonesia. Forest Ecol Manage 1998;108:25160.
[20] Hall DO. Biomass energy in industrialised countries. A view of the future.
Forest Ecol Manage 1997;91:1745.
[21] Loehnertz PS, Cooz VI, Guerrero J. Sawing hardwoods in ve tropical countries.
Forest Prod J 1996;46:516.
[22] Brown S. Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a Primer.
FAO Forestry Paper 134, Rome; 1997.
[23] Nascimentoa EMH, Laurance FW. Total aboveground biomass in central
Amazonian rainforests: a landscape-scale study. Forest Ecol Manage
2002;168:31121.
[24] Holmes TP, Blate GM, Zweede JC, Pereira R, Barreto P, Boltz F, et al. Financial
and ecological indicators of reduced impact logging performance in the
eastern Amazon. Forest Ecol Manage 2002;163:93110.
[25] Sist P, Saridan A. Description of the primary lowland forest of Berau. In:
Bertault JG, Kadir K, editors. Silvicultural research in a lowland mixed
dipterocarp forest of East Kalimantan. The contribution of STREK project.
CIRAD-FORDA-P.T. INHUTANII; 1998. p. 5194.
[26] Brown C. The global outlook for future wood supply from forest plantations.
FAO Working Paper, GFPOS/WP/03; 2000. 156 p.
[27] Miranda I, Almeida MH, Pereira H. Inuence of provenance, subspecies, and
site on wood density in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Wood Fiber Sci
2007;33:915.
[28] Arroja L, Dias AC, Capela I. The role of Eucalyptus globulus forest and products
in carbon sequestration. Climatic Change 2006;74:12340.
[29] Varmola M, Del Lungo A. Planted forests database: structure and contents. FAO
Planted Forests and Trees Working Papers FP/25. FAO, Rome; 2003.
[30] Energy Information Administration. International Energy Annual 2006; 2006.
<http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/energyconsumption.html>
[accessed 17.03.09].
[31] Blasing TJ, Broniak C, Marland G. State-by-state carbon dioxide emissions from
fossil-fuel use in the United States 19602000. Mitigat Adaptat Strat Global
Change 2005;10:65974.
[32] FAO. Selected indicators of food and agriculture development in Asia-Pacic
region 1992-2002. RAP PUBLICATION: 2003/10, Bangkok: FAO; 2003.
[33] Yamamoto H, Yamaji K, Fujino J. Evaluation of bioenergy resources with a
global land use and energy model formulated with SD technique. Appl Energy
1999;63:10113.
[34] FAO. Asia-Pacic forestry towards 2010. Report of the Asia-Pacic forestry
outlook study. Asia-Pacic Forestry Commission, Rome: FAO; 1998a.
[35] FAO. Global bre supply model. Rome: FAO; 1998b.
[36] FAO. Global forest products consumption, production, trade and prices: global
forest products model projections to 2010. Rome: FAO; 1998c.
[37] Kato T. Timber trafckingIllegal logging in Indonesia, Southeast Asia and
international consumption of illegally sourced timber. Kyoto Review of

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015

ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Sasaki et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2009) xxxxxx

[38]
[39]

[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]

Southeast Asia 2002. <http://kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/issue/issue1/

article_151_p.html>.
Nawir AA, Murniati, Rumboko L, editors. Forest rehabilitation in Indonesia:
where to after three decades. Bogor: CIFOR; 2006.
Pulhin JM, Chokkalingam U, Peras RJJJ, Acosta RT, Carandang AP, Natividad MQ,
et al. Chapter 2: historical overview. In: Chokkalingam U, Carandang AP, Pulhin
JM, Lasco RD, Peras RJJ, Toma T, editors. One century of forest rehabilitation in
the Philippines: approaches, outcomes and lessons. Bogor: CIFOR; 2006. p. 641.
de Jong W, Sam DD, Hung TV. Forest rehabilitation in Vietnam: histories,
realities and future. Bogor: CIFOR; 2006.
Meyfroidt P, Lambin EF. Forest transition in Vietnam and its environmental
impacts. Glob Change Biol 2008;14:18.
UNFCCC. Report of the conference of the parties on its thirteenth session, held
in Bali from 3 to 15 December 2007. FCCC/CP/2007/6/Add, UNFCCC; 2008.
International Institute for Sustainable Development. Summery of the
fourteenth conference of the parties to the UNFCCC and fourteenth

[44]

[45]
[46]

[47]

[48]

11

meeting of the Kyoto Protocol: 112 December 2008. Earth Neg Bull 2008;
12(395).
Kindermann G, Obersteiner M, Sohngen B, Sathaye J, Andrasko K, Rametsteiner
E, et al. Global cost estimates of reducing carbon emissions through avoided
deforestation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008;105:103027.
Jha S, Bawa KS. Population growth, human development, and deforestation in
biodiversity hotspots. Conserv Biol 2006;20:90612.
Morton DC, DeFries RS, Shimabukuro YE, Anderson LO, Arai E, del Bon EspiritoSanto F, et al. Cropland expansion changes deforestation dynamics in the
southern Brazilian Amazon. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006;103:1463741.
Putz FE, Zuidema PA, Pinard MA, Boot RG, Sayer JA, Sheil D, et al. Improved
tropical forest management for carbon retention. PLoS Biol 2008;6(7):e166.
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.006016.
Smith NJH, Serrao EAS, Alvim PT, Falesi IC. Amazonia: resiliency and
dynamism of the land and its people. Tokyo: United Nations University; 1995.

Please cite this article in press as: Sasaki N et al. Woody biomass and bioenergy potentials in Southeast Asia between 1990 and 2020. Appl Energy (2009),
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.015